A Conceptual and Empirical Examination of Justifications for Dichotomization

Autor/inn/en	DeCoster, Jamie; Iselin, Anne-Marie R.; Gallucci, Marcello
Titel	A Conceptual and Empirical Examination of Justifications for Dichotomization
Quelle	In: Psychological Methods, 14 (2009) 4, S.349-366 (18 Seiten) PDF als Volltext Verfügbarkeit
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Zeitschriftenaufsatz
ISSN	1082-989X
DOI	10.1037/a0016956
Schlagwörter	Statistical Analysis; Classification; Monte Carlo Methods; Predictor Variables; Academic Discourse; Faculty Publishing; Researchers + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Statistische Analyse; Classification system; Klassifikation; Klassifikationssystem; Monte-Carlo-Methode; Prädiktor; Discourse; Diskurs; Researcher; Forscher
Abstract	Despite many articles reporting the problems of dichotomizing continuous measures, researchers still commonly use this practice. The authors' purpose in this article was to understand the reasons that people still dichotomize and to determine whether any of these reasons are valid. They contacted 66 researchers who had published articles using dichotomized variables and obtained their justifications for dichotomization. They also contacted 53 authors of articles published in "Psychological Methods" and asked them to identify any situations in which they believed dichotomized indicators could perform better. Justifications provided by these two groups fell into three broad categories, which the authors explored both logically and with Monte Carlo simulations. Continuous indicators were superior in the majority of circumstances and never performed substantially worse than the dichotomized indicators, but the simulations did reveal specific situations in which dichotomized indicators performed as well as or better than the original continuous indicators. The authors also considered several justifications for dichotomization that did not lend themselves to simulation, but in each case they found compelling arguments to address these situations using techniques other than dichotomization. (Contains 1 footnote, 1 table and 8 figures.) (As Provided).
Anmerkungen	American Psychological Association. Journals Department, 750 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20002-4242. Tel: 800-374-2721; Tel: 202-336-5510; Fax: 202-336-5502; e-mail: order@apa.org; Web site: http://www.apa.org/publications
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC
Update	2017/4/10